What Does Guns N' Roses Mean?

[gnrlies247]

axl rose is not gnr. he needs people around and he can't write songs all by himself. he can't come up with all the riffs and solos.

You say axl rose is not gnr, but if in say 1993 it was axl who left the band and he was replaced with another singer-do you think they would have been nearly as popular?.and it was axl who wrote a lot of the songs for gnr, and i bet he wrote all the new ones by himself.

[supaplex]

axl rose is not gnr. he needs people around and he can't write songs all by himself. he can't come up with all the riffs and solos.

You say axl rose is not gnr, but if in say 1993 it was axl who left the band and he was replaced with another singer-do you think they would have been nearly as popular?.and it was axl who wrote a lot of the songs for gnr, and i bet he wrote all the new ones by himself.

considering that after 93 nothing happened anyways i don't think it matters who left. and it's not about axl or slash or izzy, it's about the music. and whichever member would've owned the name i'd still be supporting all of them with their sideprojects.
and i bet axl didn't write the songs all by himself

[kaasupoltin]

This thread is not about Axl vs. Slash, or New GN'R vs. Old GN'R or GN'R vs. VR, it is merely a hypothetical "what if?"

..
Would the interest have been as big had Axl been working under a different band name for the past ten years and not GN'R?
..

No. It's just a fact.

[Origen]

Guns N' Roses sells the tickets. If it was just called Axl Rose as a solo artist with a band then he wouldn't sell nearly as much. And I doubt that will change any to at least a album comes.

[estrangedpaul]

im sure the name Axl Rose would have still had a huge impact!!

the name GUNS N' ROSES is a BAND, it is nothin' without the lead singer like MOST bands, but it is a band

A band that doesnt just do what the singer says n' writes, otherwise it would be workin' for a solo artist, they have there own input n' creativity, which makes this a band, in other words.......GUNS N' ROSES!!

Off Topic - it was GNR when Izzy n' Steven where out, what makes people think it cant be GNR without Slash n' Duff???(which makes them hypocrits for sayin' its not GNR)  thats why is see this as GNR!!

So it doesnt matter thinkin' what if Axl had called it Rose or whatever, it was GNR before the members from AFD n' its GNR NOW!!!                     

The name GUNS N' ROSES is alive for the right reasons and is real, NOT FOR SHOW!!!

The difference is when people start talking about new band and old band, or newGnR and oldGnR. Even Axl and his supporters refer to NewGnR and OldGnR. Therefore they are two different bands.

I think the easiest way to answer the question of Axl as a solo artist compared with GNR is to compare to other bands.

Robert Plant is touring on his own with a new band playing some Led Zep songs and some new songs. It's popular but nothing amazing. Now, If Plant called that band Led Zeppelin and released his solo albums under that name, the difference would be huge. Page and Plant (the equivalent of Axl and Slash) toured together and even though they were the two most important guys and playing LedZep songs, it still wasn't near as big as if they called it Led Zeppelin, which they could of and would have got away with, but Plant refuses to use the name Led Zeppelin without John Bonham.

Another interesting comparison is to Zack De La Rocha. He, like Rose has been working on an album since his band broke up, but this time a solo name, rather than Rage Against The Machine. Does it keep up as much interest as if he was working as Rage Against The Machine? I'm not sure, maybe some big RATM fans can help us.

[estrangedpaul]

axl rose is not gnr. he needs people around and he can't write songs all by himself. he can't come up with all the riffs and solos.

You say axl rose is not gnr, but if in say 1993 it was axl who left the band and he was replaced with another singer-do you think they would have been nearly as popular?

No, but the same could be said of Slash. I know lots of people not going to upcoming GnR gigs coz he isn't there.

.and it was axl who wrote a lot of the songs for gnr, and i bet he wrote all the new ones by himself

You bet? Why do you have inside information?I would have bet that about the old stuff until I read the song credits and realised Izzy wrote more than anyone. In actual fact he wrote the Blues with Dizzy, Madagascar with Pittman, Better with Finck and I'm sure all the others had strong contributions from the other members, especially as Axl doesn't write riffs or solos!

[ClintroN]

im sure the name Axl Rose would have still had a huge impact!!

the name GUNS N' ROSES is a BAND, it is nothin' without the lead singer like MOST bands, but it is a band

A band that doesnt just do what the singer says n' writes, otherwise it would be workin' for a solo artist, they have there own input n' creativity, which makes this a band, in other words.......GUNS N' ROSES!!

Off Topic - it was GNR when Izzy n' Steven where out, what makes people think it cant be GNR without Slash n' Duff???(which makes them hypocrits for sayin' its not GNR)  thats why is see this as GNR!!

So it doesnt matter thinkin' what if Axl had called it Rose or whatever, it was GNR before the members from AFD n' its GNR NOW!!!                     

The name GUNS N' ROSES is alive for the right reasons and is real, NOT FOR SHOW!!!

The difference is when people start talking about new band and old band, or newGnR and oldGnR. Even Axl and his supporters refer to NewGnR and OldGnR. Therefore they are two different bands.

I think the easiest way to answer the question of Axl as a solo artist compared with GNR is to compare to other bands.

Robert Plant is touring on his own with a new band playing some Led Zep songs and some new songs. It's popular but nothing amazing. Now, If Plant called that band Led Zeppelin and released his solo albums under that name, the difference would be huge. Page and Plant (the equivalent of Axl and Slash) toured together and even though they were the two most important guys and playing LedZep songs, it still wasn't near as big as if they called it Led Zeppelin, which they could of and would have got away with, but Plant refuses to use the name Led Zeppelin without John Bonham.

Another interesting comparison is to Zack De La Rocha. He, like Rose has been working on an album since his band broke up, but this time a solo name, rather than Rage Against The Machine. Does it keep up as much interest as if he was working as Rage Against The Machine? I'm not sure, maybe some big RATM fans can help us.

the difference here is GNR never broke up (if ya know what i mean), if Robert Plant decided outta the blue to call it Led Zeppelin it would be a kick in the guts, he's just usin' the name for show, that was never Axl's intention, members quit in GNR, they didnt break up all together.

Same with RATM, they broke up officially, Zack doesnt have the right to use the name.

[Brody]

Guns N' Roses sells the tickets. If it was just called Axl Rose as a solo artist with a band then he wouldn't sell nearly as much. And I doubt that will change any to at least a album comes.

Paul McCartney sells tickets just fine!

[Origen]

Guns N' Roses sells the tickets. If it was just called Axl Rose as a solo artist with a band then he wouldn't sell nearly as much. And I doubt that will change any to at least a album comes.

Paul McCartney sells tickets just fine!

And has been an established solo artist for how many years?

And if the original Beatles could reform (rip John & George) then what would you think would sell more, Paul McCartney or The Beatles (name).

[NicoRourke]

Jesus.

GN'R is simply a band with Axl Rose, Robin Finck, Dizzy Reed, Richard Fortus, Brain, Chris Pitman, Ron Thal and Tommy Stinson. End of story.

Those people in the band write and play songs.

In the past, GN'R had some other members that came and left.

Originaly, there was Axl Rose, Duff McKagan, Slash, bla bla bla.

Some left, some stayed, almost from day one. Axl wanted GN'R to continue. He had differences with Slash and other people. Some of them left. Some others came.

This we have now is simply : Guns N' Roses

Accept it or leave the subject alone. It's the same discussions since, well ... I can't even remember since when it's kinda boring now.

[damien24]

i thought the name came from
tracy GUNNS
axl ROSE
duff 'ROSE' mcgagebeban

pure and simple.

[Origen]

The name comes from Tracii GUNS and Axl ROSE.

The real original lineup was:

Axl Rose
Izzy Stradlin
Tracii Guns
Rob Gardener
Ole

The "Appetite" lineup was about the 3rd lineup of Guns N Roses

[Big Gun]

i like to compare GNR with a soccer/football team. players come and go but the name stays the same. sometimes the soccer/football team sucks some other times they are great. GNR were great,the best...now i dont know what to say about them! i have only heard some half ass demos and i wouldnt even dream of comparing them with the old material, not until i listen to the cd(this autum hopefully). pending new GNRs album GNR means AXLs project.

[.Seal]

Are you seriously saying you don't understand what "Axl is GNR" really means/implies? No one is saying Axl can do it alone. That's just moronic.

In short, it's the other way around. No one can do it without Axl (be GNR, that is).

That sums it up quit nicely.. Axl was the heart of the band and from him everything starts. You can just think about VR and why isn't it as great as GN'R was even when it has Slash, Duff and Sorum? Because they are missing the magical vocalist and well this is just my oppinion but Scott Weiland isn't anything that sensational.. In the end how good the band is and how great the other members are it all comes down to the vocals. That's why Axl was/is so important.

Without Axl you get VR which is a great band but is still missing the most important factor that made GN'R the "last" big rock band.

It's funny how people say that this new GN'R isn't really GN'R because it doesn't have Slash, Duff, Izzy but in reality from those 3 only Izzy is part of the orignal line up along with Axl. Now that is an irrelevant fact but people just seem to think that GN'R = Axl + Slash + Duff (+Izzy).

Simply IMO Axl is the only member you can't replace his vocals create Guns N' Roses and without Axl it's just Velvet Revolver.


Oh and btw if you think about it the name properly spelled would be Guns' and Rose's so basicly the name just means that it's Tracii Guns' and Axl Rose's band nothing else.


Just my 2cents..


Don't damn me
When I speak a piece of my mind
'Cause silence isn't golden
...
An I know you don't wanna hear me deny
That your satisfaction lies in your illusion
But your delusions are yours and not mine
We take for granted we know the whole story
We judge a book by its cover
...

 

[RichardNixon]

They are called Guns N' Roses because in the very original band there was Duff (Rose) McKagan, Axl Rose and Tracii Guns.

But to look into more closely, I think "Guns" represents the band's aggressive side and "Roses" represents the band's sensitive side. "Estranged" or SCOM are the Roses, WTTJ and "Coma" are the Guns.

I see old GN'R and nu-GN'R both being GN'R.

It's like Classic Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation.

[ClintroN]

They are called Guns N' Roses because in the very original band there was Duff (Rose) McKagan, Axl Rose and Tracii Guns.

But to look into more closely, I think "Guns" represents the band's aggressive side and "Roses" represents the band's sensitive side. "Estranged" or SCOM are the Roses, WTTJ and "Coma" are the Guns.

I see old GN'R and nu-GN'R both being GN'R.

It's like Classic Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation.

aaahhhhhhhhhh, thats hit the nail!!   spot on!!

nice one dude!!

[Gargh!]

The AC/DC reference is also totally irrelevant. Ever heard about the exception...?

What about Deep Purple?
Or The Who without Pete and John?
Hell, even Bruce Dickenson isn't the "real" Iron Maiden singer...

[Big Gun]

what if VR got this guy...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL8nSn8wm6U&search=EL%20PRESIDENTE ??

[GnR-NOW]

I think Gun n' Roses is just a cool name to have for a band. ?I think we are all interested in it because they have many so many great songs in the past, and the promise of future material has us all hooked for what could be. ?I think Axl should use the name, simply because he owns it. ?I dont really think it is that big of deal, thats just what it is bottom line. ?I think theres alot of interest in the current band members as well. ?Would Axl still draw as much interest without the GNR name no, but no one will. ?the VR hype really died down, but GNR has a mystery about it that can draw people in. ?The only unfair part of the whole thing is WTTJ, SCOM, PC ... are classic songs, there will never be another song like those, however TWAT, Better, Blues .... are amazing, and just as good in a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT way, but they'll be compared to the original bands songs, and forever be told theyre not as good, therefore the current GNR is a joke. ?Which is totall bullshit.

[WARose]

They are called Guns N' Roses because in the very original band there was Duff (Rose) McKagan, Axl Rose and Tracii Guns.

But to look into more closely, I think "Guns" represents the band's aggressive side and "Roses" represents the band's sensitive side. "Estranged" or SCOM are the Roses, WTTJ and "Coma" are the Guns.

I see old GN'R and nu-GN'R both being GN'R.

It's like Classic Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation.

great post, but i don?t agree with the "duff "rose" mckagan" part...